How big is this world? I have heard it's big, and I for one think those areas look different. I've not been able to find anything about how large the world is, or really anything objective about the game at all. I realize that it's a game that for whatever reason has polarized people, but if one of you has objective information about the landmass size, variety, style, etc. or about the game in general I'd be interested to see it.

---

Originally posted by ozerinx
You've been trolling this thread and venting about china for the past 9 pages. You need some therapy.
I am not from China I dislike their government and policies myself but to talk shit about a country that you only know about through media/news is naive.

---

I wish people would stop quoting page numbers as a measure of time or distance or whatever. Your page numbers might not correspond to my page numbers. You can change the post limit in your settings. You could actually use a measure of time if you wanted to, or something else. Just saying.

As for the debate, I think China's evil. I think most people understand this. I think most people want to stop them but don't know how. We should work on this. But their control over what gender avatars you play is the least of our worries with them, you know?

---

Originally posted by heremypet
Thanks, Leodious.  I thought a bit about what you said and a solution comes to mind.
I'll call it tagging.  in this system the difference in level and skill is 0, all tiers are the same.  You choose which tier you want and from then on those rules apply to your character and in each encounter, quest, and raid you face.  It's not easy to explain, so think of it this way:
A mob is wandering unaggroed.  This mob is a shell and has no tier.  When it becomes aggroed the person who tagged it applies their ruleset to the mob, which is probably just a scale or something, sooo basically mr grade D player aggroes a wolf, and at that moment the wolf becomes the grade D version, which isn't complex or anything, it just changes the pointer to the DB entry for that wolf I would guess..  So as grade D player is fighting grade D wolf, grade S can help if he wants to but, the wolf would still only drop grade D items and would only provide the appropriate XP or skill to grade D participants, since it was triggered by a grade D player.
The same could be applied to quests, and raids bosses and even items, skills, and  spells etc, just make sure the right grade of player gets the aggro, but the trigger could be done any number of ways.  Such a design would benefit greatly from instancing, although I see instancing as a lazy way to handle content delivery.

---

I really like the shell idea. That could work in so many amazing ways, and would only take extra database entries of skills and power, not actual development of new skills and powers. Very efficient and clever.

I think it could even be used to solve the chronic solo/small group/raid debate. If a small group enters, the dungeon scales to their number. If a large group goes in, the same. If a single person enters, it scales to that. This could even prevent mobs from using abilities that might be unstoppable for a certain class/archetype. It would probably mean less actual content, but it would mean that all content would be equally accessible to everyone, regardless of playstyle.

In this way you could have tiers or ability and levels of power based on groups. I have seen much discussion about solo vs. groups, and this would stop that hard. I really like the idea that out in the world, you can attack a random mob, and its power is determined by your own, and by what you are willing to risk to take it on. That could mean a lot.

The problems that arise from this are PvP and powerleveling. How can you keep the person that knows all sorts of things from developing a strategy that could always kill that poor archer out there by themselves? And how can you stop people from grouping up with a high person who kills a high level S rank thing and gets the power from it.

I suppose you could use an Elderscrolls or Darkfall system of level skills, in a skill-based version of this concept, in which you can only level an ability by actually using it. That might help guide people towards what they like. I like that in those games because what you enjoy doing ends up being what you're good at.

I really, really, really like the core idea that you are presenting here. There are some things that I would do differently, mostly in the vein of not using a level (or power) based differentiation system. I am not sure what I would use, but there would have to be a system in which S players could go kill things with their C or B friends, but not let the content be trivial to them (think of a high level going into a low level dungeon in most MMOs).

I think many of the people here are missing the core of your point because of your use of level, even when you declare that that is not your point, and you can use other systems to make the differentiation. I say fie to you rude people, and ask you to argue the point at hand.

I do however disagree with your concept that group content should be relegated to the harder stuff. Perhaps the first tier should be only solo, or mostly solo, so that players get the hang of their chosen play style before they are set to working in a team. I think that is a key part of any game, and most games have you play solo for a while to learn the ropes, so to speak. I would suggest that later on, there is both solo and group content that is equally hard, with perhaps the S tier being an exception. You do not want to be killed to such a harsh penalty because you did not know any healing or escape abilities (or whatever caused you to die in that specific situation against a specific enemy; it has happened to all of us, thinking we would not have died if we had been playing our <insert class / archetype here>).

I do agree that death penalties should be increasingly harsh. Again I am not sure how to implement this, but I am not a designer. I think harsher death penalties are crucial to increasing the level of adrenaline and the risk/reward factor. I think this method would be a fantastic way to incorporate multiple death penalty ideas into a single game and have them work together.

I think, perhaps, a decent way to do this would be to use skill points, ala Eve. You start out at the lowest tier, and when you are a member of that tier your skill points are capped. That means you can be just as strong as a higher rank person, but very specialised, and at higher ranks you can focus on more and more skills so that you are a more well-rounded and versatile character. For this to work I do not think it should ever be possible for even S rank people to know the max of every skill, because this would trivialise everything in my mind. But then, there would need to be some way to reset your skills so that you could spend your points in another way. Also, this would mean the Eve time-based type progression would not work well with this.

Overall, I think this is brilliant, and if people would be constructive, could be worked into a full-fledged progression system that I would love to see implemented somewhere. I want to thank you for thinking outside the box.

---

Originally posted by cmar001
<Mod Edit>

To be clear. I don't like WoW. I played it some time ago, but that was mostly because I loved the RTS games and wanted to be a part of that world - but that is neither here nor there.

WoW is not a bad game, however. I do not like many of their mechanics, and I do not like their gear grind or the general power of gear. I do not like the crafting, and I do not like the direction the lore is going. I do not like how raiding has progressed (though it is better than 40 mans). However, this is not to say it is a bad game. I do not like these things because they do not suit me personally, due to my playstyle or my desires for a game, not because they are poorly done. They are masterfully done, and the level of polish far, FAR outclasses everything else out there. End of story.

WoW is a good game. You might not like it either, but it is very, very well done, for what it is. That is key. It is what it is. If you don't like it, that is different from it not being good.

Sorry, I seem to have harped on a that a little too hard.

I am hearing a lot about much of the landmass being empty space. I like a large world, but it seems like large tracts of empty desert would be incredibly dull. Say it isn't so!

My guess would be because more people have actually played it, and they realized it's pretty boring and the same as WoW, which is where most of them came from.

---

Originally posted by twhint

---

Originally posted by Leodious

This game sounds really interesting. How big a world are we talking?

---

 
Well, to get from the  southernmost town to the first town in S2 will take you well over an hour and a half of straight run through on a horse.

---

That sounds...huge.

This game sounds really interesting. How big a world are we talking?

I think games need a little bit of a grind to force you to kill so that you understand your character. More time spent killing is more time practicing. I miss games that are hard enough that you need to practice, though. The trend is continuing towards playing to the lowest common denominator, to make the most money. Same thing that happened in school; they taught to the slowest students (don't get me wrong, they need to learn to, I just wish there had been a group for faster students that met more than once a week) so I was constantly bored. Now I'm bored in most games because they are too easy.

---

Originally posted by skarwolf
 In DAOC I met this merc who I grouped with daily.  We got along fine then one day he introduced me to his RL girlfriend who played a mage.  Right off the bat she'd aggro stuff that we hadn't pulled.  We spent more time running then killing and when told to stop thought it was funny.  She'd later join a guild I was in and spent most of the time trying to cyber me.  I figured if she's like that with me, and I didn't even know her she was probably doing it with everyone.  She'd send me pictures of herself (she was attractive) wearing a school girl uniform, tied up... wierd shit like that but I always figured it probably wasn't her.
I found out she was cybering some other dude in my guild by mistake.  I was talking to him in a group and offering my opinion to him that she was basically insane and needed attention and would probably fit right in on the Jerry Springer show.  Few hours later she logs in and sends me a tell "So I'd fit right in on the Jerry Springer show eh?|
This asswipe told her because he was obsessed and cybering her all the time.  I found out they'd meet in RL life.  The worst part the old friend merc I had ended up breaking up with her.  One day he logged in and started sending me hate tells about screwing his girlfriend (which I never did) and I explained to him it was this other dude.  He ended up getting banned for real life threats.  I learned afterwards that his life was such a shambles he ended up having to rent out the downstairs of his ex while she lived up stairs with her new boyfriend lol....  

---

This was hilarious until the last line. That really, really sucks.

On the funny note, there are chicks like this in every game, and usually they are really bad players, like you say. When I was playing WoW, there was this hunter that didn't understand how to use her pet so she aggroed with that all the time. She would pull, even in instances, large groups that no one else was ready for, or even mobs in the corner that we weren't going to pull anyway. She was just terrible and she got us killed all the time, and was generally more trouble than she was worth. But she was a girl, and she had a cute voice on Vent, and she was generally flirty with all the guys, so they kept her around. I guess it's true what they say about the average gamer and girls.

---

Originally posted by hailtothor

---

Originally posted by Baoghal

Generally speaking, I believe people don't necessarily want to group together in order to have fun. Lots of people play MMOs in order to escape to a different world and/or have a shared experience with others. They'd like to be part of a different society. It's not always just about playing through the quests with other people.

---

I can see what you mean, but I still don't think that you need to play an MMO to achieve that, as you still share the expeiereince of a game on an online forums etc. But yeah...I can see why someone would play MMOs just for that...good answer.
 

---

I sometimes like to group, but I need to be able to solo. I play MMOs because they are persistent worlds. I log out, and the world keeps going. I come back, and it is the same world, with the same people. I encounter the same friends and the same enemies. I usually only group for things I absolutely have to, especially these days where most MMOs are tailored to soloing, so if if I am in a group, it is so easy I can't stand it.

---

Originally posted by skarwolf
 The guild I was in at the time tolerated the incessant whining because the individual played a cleric.  The guild was very short on clerics and always had to rely on people outside the guild which proved frustrating when the outside cleric got loot our clerics needed.  Of course it was hard to entice someone to assist your raid and tell them they couldn't get the loot... we had that issue.
We always had to step in eggshells when this person played.  The slightest misinterpretation of a statement or if you suggested how to do something and she'd log in a hissy fit and pout.  Usually she'd log onto an alt and whine to officers and other people.  This went on for too long in part because most of the leading officers were also women.  Eventually my problems were solved by leaving the guild for another.  

---

Hell, that's most women in general (misinterpretation of statements). The neeing validation is just an ugly girl wanting to feel pretty online because she can't irl. It happens every day. I agree. Avoid the crazy bitches like the plague. There are enough you have to deal with irl.

---

Originally posted by thafireball
And......you could get hit by lightning tomorrow and none of it would matter.  What are the damn chances that something like them taking your data and using it to gain some unfair advantage over you in the real world?  C'mon lady (or man) think about it...you sound like you don't let your children play outside because they have a chance of scraping their knee, possibly getting the scrape infected, and maybe even having to amputate it because of the infection.  Jeeeeeez get real.

---

I love this. I know the internet is scary, but please!

1) Blizzard does NOT care enough about you to take your info.
2) A hacker (unless they know you personally) does NOT care enough about you to take your info. You are more likely to give someone your information willingly (phishing).

Don't blow things out of proportion. If you felt you were personally attacked you need to both figure out that people aren't that nice on the internet because they are being honest, and you should have been coming here for information not to warn us. The vast majority of people here understand the internet and, it seems, Warder, much better than you do.

Like someone said, this is like the swine flu scare, or shark attack scares of previous summers, or SARS. PLEASE?!?! Why do people blow things out of proportion so they get terrified. I know why the media does it, but why are people stupid enough to fall for it. Now that I think about it, this parent probably heard some news story about a kid getting in trouble over the internet and now is freaking out. Well good. I don't want someone like that on the internet anyway. They're creepy. Like homeschool kids.

How can you not know this?! This is how every pay to play game will work. Every single one. And don't tell me it's because you're new. I was new once, and this concept did not escape me. You pay every month in order to keep paying.

You can use gamecards if you want. Just buy a new one and apply it each month, and your credit card will not be used. You have to buy the gamecard to activate the game with it, obviously. And THEN you need to buy a new card to give you another month of play. You don't have to use your CC ever. And if you are too afraid to use your CC online, good riddance to you. If you aren't stupid enough to get caught in a phishing scam, you have nothing to worry about. And if you just don't like CCs on principle, you can use a debit card which takes money right out of your bank account.

This is information you need to have to function in this world. This is like buying a cell phone and then freaking out that you have to pay for each month. How can you not know that?!

---

Originally posted by gakule
McCaffee is bad.

---

Very bad. Nothing about it is helpful. Get rid of it ASAP.

Wow, that this is even possible is truly amazing. Good on them; this is a very interesting game.

Thanks, Avery. This is an interesting story. I'm not sure who I'd like to win; I like both companies and I like their games. This seems a little petty though, on both parts. It would have been simple for Interplay work worth through Bethesda, but it does seem a little like Bethesda just wants to edge Interplay out so they can make their own MMO of Fallout. Odd.

This is pretty clever. I don't have it installed so I can't test how good it actually is, but I really like it when people that think of something or find out something take the initiative to tell people about what they learned.

Thanks.

---

Originally posted by jaxsundane

---

Originally posted by grimfall

---

Originally posted by Salvatoris

---

Originally posted by Hepisodic

 The only bad thing about this game is Funcom is making it. That alone turns many people off. 
 
The idea for the game though is completely solid and I hope Failcom learned from its AoC failure. 

---

 
I'm right there with you.  I learned my lesson about the funcom hype machine.  I've played a lot of games that were rocky at launch, but Conan just felt like bait and switch.  Most of the things that were interesting to me weren't in at launch and several of them will never be.  A year later, Conan still doesn't look like the game it was advertised as.  That game is a colossal waste of the graphics capabilities.  Environments look great, character models are excellent.. all the gear looks like ass.  Maybe getting outside the strict confines of an established IP will correct that problem.  I certainly won't get my hopes up about this game... but I'll keep a close eye on user reviews after it launches and I might look in to it if I hear enough good things.

---

 
I think the realistic armor is one of the best parts of AoC,  You can usually tell if a person has their MMO roots in PnP or in Streetfighter by how they like their visuals.

---

 
I love the apparent snideness of this remark my roots are planted firmly in 1st edition Dungeons and Dragons and I don't like that junk they wear in aoc either.  Never played a "streetfighter" where the toons wore armor so you lost me there.

---

What's wrong with the armor in AoC? It looks like something someone would actually wear when they run around killing stuff. It looks believable. I like that.